Opinion Commentary & Media VII

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
So someone is involved in an accident where a person is killed - you defend his right to refuse being tested for drugs and alcohol, understanding that the on the spot tests are not comprehensive. Is that what you are saying?
 
So someone is involved in an accident where a person is killed - you defend his right to refuse being tested for drugs and alcohol, understanding that the on the spot tests are not comprehensive. Is that what you are saying?
Im saying, IF he didn’t do anything wrong and it was an unfortunate accident. He past tests, then it just appears an abuse of power to attempt to “put someone away”. The blood test should be handled by his lawyer and not the police. If they found culpability then the lawyer can release the results
 

Log in to remove this ad.

idky the government ditched the “stop, look, listen, think” I used to sing it as a kid and still gets stuck in my head now lol

They also need to show more road safety campaign videos, today I watched in my rear view mirror a guy in a small truck leaning on his steering wheel typing on his phone with 2 hands while merging on the freeway!! So fking stupid
 
Im saying, IF he didn’t do anything wrong and it was an unfortunate accident. He past tests, then it just appears an abuse of power to attempt to “put someone away”. The blood test should be handled by his lawyer and not the police. If they found culpability then the lawyer can release the results
He passes indicative tests that indicate some basic drugs - not comprehensive. FFS - I'm staggered you think he shouldn't have to undertake a simple blood test to ensure he was or wasn't fit to be driving. His lawyer? Possible the funniest thing I have ever read on BF. You don't trust the cops and the doctors of the health system, but you would trust his own lawyer? I'm gobsmacked. By the way you say IF he didn't do anything wrong. Without comprehensive blood tests we don't know that. He may have had some illegal drugs in his system. That is illegal and wrong and, if so, he shouldn't have been on the road. That makes him culpable in some way despite the fact he may not have directly caused the accident. You drive with drugs in your system then you break the law and are responsible for any outcomes. Not negotiable.
 
Last edited:
idky the government ditched the “stop, look, listen, think” I used to sing it as a kid and still gets stuck in my head now lol

They also need to show more road safety campaign videos, today I watched in my rear view mirror a guy in a small truck leaning on his steering wheel typing on his phone with 2 hands while merging on the freeway!! So fking stupid
The nostalgia! I wish it was still shown on TV!

I still remember the recycling song lol.

"1, 2, 3, you can recycle me."

"4, 5, 6, you can't recycle this."

"7 and 8, no way mate!"
 
What happens if you take an illegal drug like cannabis a week ago, you’re no longer under the influence, but it shows up in the blood test after an accident. Would you automatically be at fault?
What if its not illegal cos you have a medical prescription?

I know its a bit unreasonable bringing this up after someone died but there is no scientifically accurate basis for any impairment test for cannabis, but it can still show up on saliva and blood tests a week or longer after use.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No. They determine impairment.

If the drugs/alcohol in your system is less than a certain level so as not to impair you, it’s ok.

But I think it’s a blood test that determines that
There is no evidence to accurately determine a relationship between blood thc concentration and impairment while driving. Last time I checked (2 years ago) legal "impairment" levels were randomly determined tho there is an association between higher blood concentrations and potential impairment that hasn't been properly determined.

Its not like a bac over 0.08 which has decades of data and testing to support it.
 
I know its a bit unreasonable bringing this up after someone died but there is no scientifically accurate basis for any impairment test for cannabis, but it can still show up on saliva and blood tests a week or longer after use.
Ultimately I think the family deserve to know all the full relevant facts of how he died. Inevitably the driver of the vehicle responsible is gonna need to be properly tested for that purpose. I imagine its about providing some closure, not for building a criminal case over some very small traces.

There doesn't seem to have been any suggestion that the truck mounted the curb, or he was driving dangerously, or anything like that? The reports suggest there were multiple bystanders who tried to come to SL's aid afterwards. More likely than not one would have said something about the driver steering erratically or something if that was the case.
 
No worries. If you live in a society where you don't trust the people who uphold the law then fair enough. Why stay here then? Go somewhere else.
Like where?

Police corruption is a problem everywhere on earth.
 
Good young key defender whose main job is actually to defend, unlike those named. You don't hear about him cos Freo
He's a gun.

Never heard of him before this year but he caught my attention in a few Freo games.
 
Like where?

Police corruption is a problem everywhere on earth.
Have you seen that TV series, "Scales of Justice"? It's on Youtube (it was at some stage anyway).

I used to share a house (allegedly) with a cop. Him and his mates would always wear the discount suit when they went to Billy Guyetts or Retravision to buy stuff like TVs and VCRs etc.

Even fish n chips or pizza or a packet of **** down at the corner shop.
 
Have you seen that TV series, "Scales of Justice"? It's on Youtube (it was at some stage anyway).

I used to share a house (allegedly) with a cop. Him and his mates would always wear the discount suit when they went to Billy Guyetts or Retravision to buy stuff like TVs and VCRs etc.

Even fish n chips or pizza or a packet of **** down at the corner shop.
If I was getting paid a shit wage on a shit roster to be the first responder to domestic violence call-outs, I’d want some perks for my trouble too.
 
I actually think that’s a bit shit that there’s no FTA games on Saturdays from next year. Too bad for people who don’t have / can’t afford Fox / Kayo and want to watch a game of footy on a Saturday night.
Do they show norths away games on 7 in Victoria?

Here in NSW, I’d only get the Good Friday game on FTA if I didn’t subscribe.
 
I actually think that’s a bit shit that there’s no FTA games on Saturdays from next year. Too bad for people who don’t have / can’t afford Fox / Kayo and want to watch a game of footy on a Saturday night.
It's been obvious, for quite some time, that the interests of those who run the AFL doesn't align with the interests of supporters
 
I actually think that’s a bit shit that there’s no FTA games on Saturdays from next year. Too bad for people who don’t have / can’t afford Fox / Kayo and want to watch a game of footy on a Saturday night.
Is that so?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top